Does it feel to anyone else that saying that superheroes appeared 10 years ago rather than 5 would've been better? Less Robin turnover, after all.

Click to expand...

If they'd stayed with the 10yr gap then would there have been much need for this massive reboot?

Click to expand...

The timing wouldn't affect the reasons for the reboot; I'm thinking that ten years would let them keep all the things they clearly want to keep fropm continuity.

Dennis, you have an odd definition of "trivia." I'm not windering how many Robins you can fit on the head of a pin, but about narrative issues: does the Batman/Robin team function effectively with a new Robin every year? Possibly so. I'm interested in seeing how it all works, but I think they might have made it easier on themselves.

Actually, on reflection, the better solution would have been to 86 some of the damn Robins. Does anyone really care about Jason Todd? And I like Tim Drake and Damian Wayne, but I'm not filled with a burning need for them to exist.

I read a comment the other day on some website to the effect that DC's relaunch shows how impatient and incapable they are of stoking enthusiasm. Ultimately, I think this is correct; the 52 different titles, and the everyone-exists-now! mentality is going to really damage how effective the relaunch will be. Not in terms of us nerds, since we're conditioned to put up with nonsense, but in terms of lapsed and new readers.

I agree, they've tried to do both strategies at the same time - they either need a longer history or to drop far more than they have. I'm not thrilled that they dropped the JLI - since the success of a new one seems entirely linked with nostalgia for the old one - but it makes sense given where the conpany wants to go.

As for Jason Todd, snce they've kept Batman mostly intact, there would be a Jason Todd-sized hole in there which would be hard to explain. His history does imply that Batman took a terrible oath never to have a Robin again after Todd died, a terrible oath that lasted ... a month? Two?

Well, we don't, that's true ... but he's still Red Hood, which implies he's had a bad day somewhere along the line. It would be hilarious if he became an anti-hero not after being murdered by the Joker, but after Batman told him he couldn't have a second cupcake or something. The Robin Internship Program takes dietary health very seriously.

Snyder moved to Batman. Daniel moved to 'Tec. They just swapped books.

DC's done that before, like in the early 90s when Marv Wolfman and Jim Aparo moved from Batman to 'Tec and Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle moved the other way.

Speaking of 'Tec, the first issue is really good. I don't know that it's the "ZOMG!" book that Bleeding Cool says it is. There's a definite "Year One" kind of feel to it (though the narration -- and the Bat-signal -- make it clear that Batman has been operating for a number of years).

Batman has been operating as an urban myth. Superman is the first public superhero, as we saw in Justice League #1 Hal was genuinely surprised that Batman was real. I'm pretty sure that DC confirmed over the summer time that Death in the Family happened. Remember everything that has been established in Batman, Inc or one can assume set up for Batman, Inc still happened in the Bat-Books.

Dennis, you have an odd definition of "trivia." I'm not windering how many Robins you can fit on the head of a pin, but about narrative issues: does the Batman/Robin team function effectively with a new Robin every year? Possibly so.

That's a fair point, and as I've said, I'm looking forward to much of this. Part of how and why I'm looking forward to this is figuring out, and watching them figure out, where they're going, and why they choose to keep what they keep. When I ask these questions, it's not to rag on DC fanboyishly (at least not always). I think it's a genuinely exciting experiment with great potential, but also potential to fall flat in some areas. When it comes to Batman, DC's already said it's mostly intact - so how the backstory worked now that the time compression is offical and not simply assumed as a sliding time scale, is really interesting.

My local comic shop is running an offer on the new 52, where they give you a card and stamp it for every one of the new books you buy. When you get five stamps, you get to pick an issue for free. I already have four stamps, so when I pick up Batman & Robin #1 next Wednesday, I'll be entitled to my free one. At first I was gonna go with Green Lantern, but then I started thinking about whether I should use it as an opportunity to try something new (and just buy GL #1 anyway). There's a few that look interesting, like Deathstroke, Suicide Squad, Red Lanterns...

Reading the JL, the new Action Comics, and then the Detective.... there's no clear IN BOOK indication of when these stories take place... or have I missed something. Action takes place in the "past," the JL is supposed to take place "5 years" ago and Detective now... but... if I was a new reader, not connected to BBSs, how would I know that?